Ravi, I was actually talking about Buddhism as there is a large body of information targeting the ignorant masses looking for a different spiritual practice. It has been dumbed down and I'm not clear that benefit could not be gained by cherry-picking some of the techniques, regardless of whether one delves more deeply into the complexities of "Buddhism."
It's free and seems more above-board in this respect. I disagree that people don't appreciate things they receive for free and the commitment comes from inside, in all regards. I just keep believing that it doesn't matter so much what tradition is followed if one's intention and practice serve to meet one's personal needs. For me, for example, if I just simply sit and breathe for 30 minutes and focus on my breath, which is the simplest of things to do, I start to calm down. If that is all I ever manage, it may not get me to an altered state or "higher" level of consciousness, but it might improve the quality of my life still. I do agree that there is likely more to be gained from more in-depth study and participation in a spiritual practice of one's choosing. I bought an Macbook Pro and paid extra for the hand-holding contract piece, but I don't find that I feel particularly special, just poorer. ________________________________ From: Ravi Yogi <raviy...@att.net> To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sunday, November 6, 2011 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reality Distortion Field: from Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson Hmm..Denise I'm confused - you must be referring to TM while I was talking about Buddhism. As far as I can see, there is value in TM charging money - one people never appreciate anything they receive for free, secondly they put more effort since they have paid it and thirdly it makes them feel special, much like buying an Apple product which is very helpful in initial stages. On Nov 6, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Denise Evans <dmevans...@yahoo.com> wrote: ><snip> > > >"Buddhism is a great but arduous path, not for everyone, only for a few who >have the great intellect combined with proper discrimination...." > > > >I don't see why it has to be so complicated or why one has to buy in >fully....I think there may be value in practicing principles and techniques >that can be spoon-fed to the masses...like Yogurt-lite. > > > >________________________________ >From: Ravi Yogi <raviy...@att.net> >To: "FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> >Sent: Sunday, November 6, 2011 1:01 PM >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Reality Distortion Field: from Steve Jobs by >Walter Isaacson > > > >On Nov 6, 2011, at 10:21 AM, "seventhray1" <steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > >> >>I understand what you are saying. I'll be honest. I skim so lightly >>whatever Nabby says, that I really can't say what Tart was responding to. >>But I liked Tart's response. Evidently he was choosing not to respond >>directly to something Nabby said, and chose to go off on his own tangent. >>One thing to point out. This was something the great Master, MMY used to do >>constantly. It was one of his defining characteristics. >>Would you care to comment on Tart's assertion that duality it ultimately a >>mirage, and that the true reality is one of unity? > >You know I'm not the one to have dry intellectual discussions. Words don't >mean anything but yes its unity and Unity doesn't exclude duality. In fact one >in Unity is engaged with duality with much more fervor and intensity than one >who has not, hence Lord Krishna is treated as a purna avatar( a complete or a >perfect manifestation of Unity). > > >Buddhism is a great but arduous path, not for everyone, only for a few who >have the great intellect combined with proper discrimination, say someone like >Judy. Buddhism, unfortunately has become a great refuge of all the mentally >masturbating, Western intellectuals because it gives a great satisfaction to >the ego and nothing but pseudo spirituality. > > >God I'm itching to talk, I'm really going to go after these idiots..:-) > >Or does he need follow some dialogue protocal before we can comment on that? > > >Sure there is no protocol but like Judy said he is being totally obnoxious, he >should start a separate thread and may be add a paragraph referencing his >opinions on people calling Vaj a liar. > > > > > > >>--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Yogi <raviyogi@...> wrote: >>> >>> Steve, >>> >>> Judy is spot on - say you are an enlightened man and are confronting your >>> child for lying and in walks a retarded tartbrain who says - hey you >>> enlightened man, you shouldn't be confronting your child for lying because >>> it's all love bliss, I bet you will smack tartbrain so hard that his >>> intellectually aroused head will start fitting in his hat for a few days at >>> least. >>> >>> >>> On Nov 5, 2011, at 8:21 PM, "seventhray1" steve.sundur@... wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" jstein@ wrote: >>> > > >>> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_reply@ wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > Vaj belives that if a lie is repeated often enough it becomes >>> > > > > a truth. Bless his "Buddhist" heart. >>> > > > >>> > > > That is a wonderful insight. We repeat the lie of separation >>> > > > over and over again, over so many years. One day we wake up >>> > > > laughing, no longer seeing the lie. The lie is the pathway to >>> > > > truth, life is the deepest teacher. We repeatedly bang our >>> > > > head against the wall, but that cannot last. The wall banging >>> > > > comes to a stop. The lie cannot survive, it just takes some >>> > > > intense living of the lie for it to shrivel naturally from >>> > > > its own lack of foundation. >>> > > >>> > > Non sequitur and whopping category error. >>> > > >>> > > FAIL. >>> > > >>> > Wow, what a different take. I found Tart's statement to be the best of >>> > the week. It describes the path from ignorance to realization. The lie of >>> > seperation, the truth of unity. The lotus came up from the mud, so to >>> > speak. I suppose Vaj will either back up his statement or choose to >>> > ignore the direct contradictory testimony. But I'll take Tart's tagent. >>> > Hey, that'd be a good name for a blog. >>> > >>> > >>> >> > >
